Court of Appeals of Washington· 8/31/1992

State v. Lynn

Citations

835 P.2d 251
67 Wash. App. 339
1992 Wash. App. LEXIS 401

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that sophisticated defense counsel may deliberately avoid raising constitutional issues of little or no significance to the jury verdict but which might be a basis for a successful appeal
recognizing that sophisticated defense counsel may deliberately avoid raising constitutional issues of little or no significance to the jury verdict but which might be a basis for a successful appeal
observing that criminal law \is so largely constitutionalized that most claimed errors can be phrased in constitutional terms\
RAP 2.5(a) requires the defendant to “make a showing how, in the context of the trial, the alleged error actually ‘affected’ the defendant’s rights.”
\Essential to this determination is a plausible showing by the defendant that the asserted error had practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case.\
\[A]n evidentiary error cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Forrest

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

106 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Lynn

49 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.